The Difference Between Science and the Religious

reply to post by jiggerj

you are criticizing Bible and corrupted clerics but what the hell has it to God !!!
perception of God comes through wisdom and internal feelings.

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by Wifibrains
Are you saying there are no religious scientists?

Faith has nothing to do with fact, and fact has nothing to do with truth, truth is belief. IMO science is nothing more than a religion. For those who have no faith. No?

Fact has nothing to do with truth? You want to write that again with a straight face this time?

I had a straight face when I last typed it

For instance, if I say to a believer "god exsists" and he believes, it is truth.... To him.
If I say the same to a nonbeliever "god exsists" and he does not believe, it is not truth to him.

So it really comes down to perseptions as to what truth actualy is, truth is belief. We can only expeirience god, you cannot catch him/her/it and take a sample to show to everyone as proof. If you don't have the expeirience all there is left is faith, or denial.

The religious can be scientific,...... TOO.

reply to post by Angle

The religious can be scientific,...... TOO.

Yeah?

"Although there are scientific reasons for accepting a young earth, I am a young age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate." - Kurt Wise, Harvard geologist

Kurt Wise

They can be, but WILL they be?

Originally posted by maes2
reply to post by jiggerj

 

perception of God comes through wisdom and internal feelings.

Soooo? Without the bible ever being written you would have attained knowledge of a god through your feelings?

Originally posted by Angle
The religious can be scientific,...... TOO.

Indeed...

The Rev. John Charlton Polkinghorne, KBE, FRS (born 16 October 1930) is an English theoretical physicist, theologian, writer, and Anglican priest. He was professor of Mathematical physics at the University of Cambridge from 1968 to 1979, when he resigned his chair to study for the priesthood, becoming an ordained Anglican priest in 1982. He served as the president of Queens' College, Cambridge from 1988 until 1996.

Polkinghorne is the author of five books on physics, and 26 on the relationship between science and religion; his publications include The Quantum World (1989), Quantum Physics and Theology: An Unexpected Kinship (2005), Exploring Reality: The Intertwining of Science and Religion (2007), and Questions of Truth (2009).[1] The Polkinghorne Reader (edited by Thomas Jay Oord) provides key excerpts from Polkinghorne's most influential books. He was knighted in 1997 and in 2002 received the £1 million Templeton Prize, awarded for exceptional contributions to affirming life's spiritual dimension.[2]

After two years in Scotland, he returned to teach at Cambridge in 1958. He was promoted to reader in 1965, and in 1968 was offered a professorship in mathematical physics, a position he held until 1979,[3] his students including Brian Josephson and Martin Rees.[5] For 25 years, he worked on theories about elementary particles, played a role in the discovery of the quark,[2] and researched the analytic and high-energy properties of Feynman integrals and the foundations of S-Matrix theory.[6] While employed by Cambridge, he also spent time at Princeton, Berkeley, Stanford, and at CERN in Geneva. He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1974.[3]

Polkinghorne decided to train for the priesthood in 1977.[7] He said in an interview that he felt he had done his bit for science after 25 years, and that his best mathematical work was probably behind him; Christianity had always been central to his life, so ordination offered an attractive second career.[3] He resigned his chair in 1979 to study at Westcott House, Cambridge, an Anglican theological college, becoming an ordained priest on 6 June 1982 (Trinity Sunday). The ceremony was held at Trinity College, Cambridge and presided over by Bishop John A. T. Robinson. He worked for five years as a curate in south Bristol, then as vicar in Blean, Kent, before returning to Cambridge in 1986 as dean of chapel at Trinity Hall.[2][8] He became the president of Queens' College that year, a position he held until his retirement in 1996.[8] He served as canon theologian of Liverpool Cathedral from 1994 to 2005.[9]

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Wifibrains

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by Wifibrains
Are you saying there are no religious scientists?

Faith has nothing to do with fact, and fact has nothing to do with truth, truth is belief. IMO science is nothing more than a religion. For those who have no faith. No?

Fact has nothing to do with truth? You want to write that again with a straight face this time?

I had a straight face when I last typed it

For instance, if I say to a believer "god exsists" and he believes, it is truth.... To him.
If I say the same to a nonbeliever "god exsists" and he does not believe, it is not truth to him.

So it really comes down to perseptions as to what truth actualy is, truth is belief. We can only expeirience god, you cannot catch him/her/it and take a sample to show to everyone as proof. If you don't have the expeirience all there is left is faith, or denial.

edit on 3-12-2012 by Wifibrains because: (no reason given)

Hi Wifi,
Either something is true or it isn't. A truth is a truth for everyone. If I say going to the ballet is fun (which it sooo isn't!), this is just my opinion, and many will tell me just how untrue it is. lol

Originally posted by Wifibrains
Are you saying there are no religious scientists?

Faith has nothing to do with fact, and fact has nothing to do with truth, truth is belief. IMO science is nothing more than a religion. For those who have no faith. No?

Science is not a religion.

Science is EVERYTHING in the universe, absolutely everything.

Religion is a belief system in where there's a higher being or creator, who made the universe.

science is an extension of religion, their quest are one and the same. This case in question we know which proverbial chicken or the egg came first.

www.godandscience.org...

here is a really good page I always wish some atheist will attempt a refute to.

www.godandscience.org...

enjoy...

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by maes2
reply to post by jiggerj

 

perception of God comes through wisdom and internal feelings.

Soooo? Without the bible ever being written you would have attained knowledge of a god through your feelings?

the answer to this is an astounding "yes" because we as a species already have, and well before the Bible was written.

there is also this man who may be able to explain a little better...

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by SisyphusRide

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by maes2
reply to post by jiggerj

 

perception of God comes through wisdom and internal feelings.

Soooo? Without the bible ever being written you would have attained knowledge of a god through your feelings?

the answer to this is an astounding "yes" because we as a species already have, and well before the Bible was written.

there is also this man who may be able to explain a little better...

en.wikipedia.org...

Hi, I need to clarify a little. I'm talking about feeling that a god exists without the bible, without mistaking a volcano for a god, and without mistaking any natural event for a supernatural one. Just sitting somewhere and feeling that a god exists.

I have felt a strangeness at times. I have been suddenly struck with a sense that there's either more to life than meets the eye, or that this life isn't even real. I can analyze these feelings as coming from hunger or a sudden surge of chemicals in my brain. But, I have never felt that a god exists. And you're saying others have? I find that very hard to believe.

reply to post by jiggerj


I hear ya... we use science and history to uncover these type of facts for us.

we've been here before... there are cave paintings of Gods or Beings being worshiped dating way back before any known religion.

check the crystallinks site

reply to post by Krono




I'm not going to defend religion, I like to pull them to pieces myself and show them for what they really are.
I'm more spiritual, as in spirit is the natural state and reality being more of an illusion.

What I would call god would be the underlying energy that makes exsistance possible. That which gives everything form. For the material it would be electric and for life would be something else. Dare I say...spirit. We are all individual expressions of this spirit and that is how we are all connected. (but seperated for this exsistance). I can't just be electrical I don't think. The spirit is kind of super conciouse. And the electric is just the medium for spirit to manifest itself through different life forms.

Some think the sun is god, or the sun of god as it is what sustains life on earth and it has been weaved into the religions of the world, but I believe the reason for our exsistance extends right though the cosmos and not just confined to our solar system.

What you say make science sound like god. And you tell me it's nothing like religion. Hmmm.

reply to post by Wifibrains

I'm not going to defend religion, I like to pull them to pieces myself and show them for what they really are.
I'm more spiritual, as in spirit is the natural state and reality being more of an illusion.

Reality is no more an illusion than ice. It's more of a MANIFESTATION of our present spirit. It's an outward sign of who we are right now. Everything in the world reflects a piece of us.

What I would call god would be the underlying energy that makes exsistance possible. That which gives everything form. For the material it would be electric and for life would be something else. Dare I say...spirit. We are all individual expressions of this spirit and that is how we are all connected. (but seperated for this exsistance). I can't just be electrical I don't think. The spirit is kind of super conciouse. And the electric is just the medium for spirit to manifest itself through different life forms.

reply to post by jiggerj


The difference between science and faith is, you and those like you claim it's just a bunch of random sh*t happening, while we give God the credit for intelligent design. When taken within the scope of how everything to create life on this planet, not just some single celled amoeboids but complex and advanced multicellular life, on a world that just happens to be in the g-spot of the solar system for sustaining advanced multicellular life is just perfect, there's just no way it was a random bunch of crap happening. The odds for all of this existing are so astronomical it flirts with the impossible.You do not find perfection in nature, you find flaws.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by jiggerj

 

The difference between science and faith is, you and those like you claim it's just a bunch of random sh*t happening, while we give God the credit for intelligent design. When taken within the scope of how everything to create life on this planet, not just some single celled amoeboids but complex and advanced multicellular life, on a world that just happens to be in the g-spot of the solar system for sustaining advanced multicellular life is just perfect, there's just no way it was a random bunch of crap happening. The odds for all of this existing are so astronomical it flirts with the impossible.You do not find perfection in nature, you find flaws.

edit on 5-12-2012 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)

Hi LW,
I'm a bit confused on your statement of

You do not find perfection in nature, you find flaws.

We know there are lots of flaws in nature: I would mention deformed creatures such as two-headed snakes, but the flaws are evident in the fact that 99% of all species have been wiped out.